1895.J MICEOSCOPICAL JOURNAL. 243 



EDITORIAL. 



Proceedings of the A. M. S., 1894-5, P^rt II. — This num- 

 ber is labeled : " Entered at the postoffice, Washington, D. C, 

 as second-class matter," but inside is the remark : " Blanks for 

 the recommendation of new members and for the titles of papers 

 are enclosed herewith." To enclose loose slips in such a man- 

 ner is a clear infraction of the United States Postal Regulation. 

 Is the society so hard up for money that its Secretary must try 

 to •' do" the government out of fourth-rate postage on its circu- 

 lars and blanks ? It is probable, however, that the vigilant pos- 

 tal authorities will detect the trick and require the Secretary to 

 unwrap all his numbers and take out these slips before he can 

 get his pamphlets mailed. 



The place of printing has been changed from Washington to 

 Ithaca, N. Y., and the printing, though passable, is not quite 

 equal to that formerly done in Washington. 



Arrangements have been made with the railroads by which 

 those attending the Ithaca meeting, August 21, 22, 23, may o^et 

 reduced rates on the certificate plan. Applications for other 

 information should go to Prof. W. H. Seaman, 1424 11th Street 

 Washington, D. C. 



Legal Microscopy. — It is of interest to know that in the 

 late third trial ot Sage versus Laidlaw, where $40,000 were given 

 the plaintiff, that the microscope turned the scale. It is said 

 that Messrs. Sage and Laidlaw are the only living witnesses 

 present at the explosion of the bomb. The others are dead. 

 Mr. Sage wore cotton pants and Laidlaw woolen. The ques- 

 tion was raised that, if the plaintiff's testimony was correct 

 wool would be found imbedded in the cotton garment of the 

 defendant. The microscope showed not only wool fiber but 

 also blood imbedded in the cotton fiber of the defendant's 

 pants where it covered the left groin, thus confirming the testi- 

 mony of Laidlaw and hence the verdict. Had the microscope 

 been employed in the first trial the other two trials would have 

 been needless. There are good reasons why lawyers should be 

 microscopists. This case is one. Why should there not be in 

 Law School chairs of Legal Morphology ? 



